Advice on sick leave

n0438

Afternoon all.......

I work for a fairly big company and they have introduced a sick leave policy whereby you get put on disciplinary if you have more than 3 instances or more than 10 days off sick in a rolling 12 month period....standard stuff to erradicate people calling in every Monday as they fancy an extra day off.

However can I just check your opinion on something.

Recently I became seriously unwell and was rushed to hospital for an emergency op. I am now on the mend and have been signed off for recouperation. However I was planning to go back soon but my GP has frustratingly hinted it could be another couple of weeks yet due to risk of infection.

If a medical professional has signed me off and I have the relevant paperwork confirming this, can my company discipline me in accordance with the sick policy ? or have they not got a leg to stand on?

Thanks all for your advice.

heretolearn_2

Yes, they will. these policies don't have an exclusion saying 'unless you have a sick note/we believe you/it is something serious'. It's for all sickness absence. It could well be that this absence just triggers the disciplinary procedure but then you aren't disciplined. Just having a disciplinary procedure/investigation doesn't automatically mean you are in trouble or have done something wrong, it's just the name for these things.

Mark_h_4

I have seen this before in places I have worked and I think at the time it was down to managers discression. Of course it is as always, it depends who you get. Some companies may be relaxed on it some may be quite firm. Its hard to say either way. We can tell you what they can do but not what they would do. These are 2 sperate questions.

n0438

Thanks for your replies - I'm not disabled, no.

It seems worrying I could potentially have a diciplinary on my record for a genuine reason - just what I don't need :-)

Thanks again.

Emmzi

but, it'll probably be a warning and a monitoring period, and it'll drop off soon enough.

jfh7gwa

Yes, the fact is that if you went back, developed an infection, and then had a 2nd instance of being off ill, that's strike 2 against you. If your GP is advising from a medical standpoint that it may be best to extend your current leave, I'd take that option.

Otherwise, all you need is one case of illness in the next year to get you into a diciplinary meeting (admittedly if they're genuine there won't be much investigation or reprimand, but I've never been in that situation myself, and I certainly wouldn't like to be found in it... ).

Mark_h wrote: »

I think at the time it was down to managers discression.

That might be true of the OP's workplace, but has never been at mine unfortunately. Even with very nice managers, no one has ever used their discretion to make exceptions like this that I'm aware of ... but I guess maybe I wouldn't know about exceptions, as it's never been me at the centre of it (I can only say this based on being privy to colleagues' stuff at work).

asparagusnextleft

Are you sure it's an actual disciplinary? I worked for a large energy company and they had a very strict sickness policy. If you triggered sickness procedure (three periods of sickness or six consecutive days, I can't remember what timescale this was within, a year I think), you went into 'stage 1' and then 'stage 2'. Stage one meant no sickness for six months and if you had sickness absence within that time you went in stage two. Stage two meant no sickness for a year and if you didn't manage that, you then went into stage three which was a disciplinary and a hearing where they decided if you were going to lose your job or not. The only point at which it became a disciplinary on your record was if you went into stage three.

To put a disciplinary on someone's employment record for one period of absence seems a bit harsh.

mazza111

Have to agree with what the others have said, it's usually done in stages. That's why it's important not to rush back. I did this and it managed to activate a stage :mad: because it meant the second absence.

So although this will probably activate the stage 1, it will probably revert after a certain time to no warnings (providing you aren't off again)

GiveMeCake

It doesn't seem fair that when you're off because of a medical reason backed up by a doctor that you can still be disciplined if you trigger the absence level, but you can. I suppose this is to deter people from being signed off as stressed every couple of months because they want time off or a holiday as doctors are only too easy to persuade that you're stressed at work!

My sister works in HR and she's had to deal with various cases of illness and several periods of leave. She says they end up getting rid of employees by saying their not fit for purpose (the job).

To be sure you're not off sick again you probably shouldn't go back until your sick note runs out however better you feel. Then just make sure within the next year you don't have any time off sick unless you have a leg falling off or something!

polka_dot_rock_and_roll

we have somthing similar , i would take as long as you need to go back to work , at the end of the day your employer has a duty of care towards you
& you dont want to cause 2 cases of absesnce where 1 would look better, a friend had something similar and she rushed back to work which led her to be off even longer through infection, so now they have a phased approach to get her back to work it what ever you feel comfortable with, am sure they would go through a staged approach of discaplinary and if the reasosns are genuine surely they cant go through the whole procedure

19lottie82

I've worked in a few places with policies similar to the one you have described. From my experience the company has to follow procedure but they look at all cases differently when deciding what action to take and common sense usually prevails.